Is Glock aiming at cutting costs recently?

Glock is a mature product. You can only do so much with it. Reduce costs to increase margin. Make small improvements to justify raising the price, market like mad to convice people that it is worth buying.

Their competitors are free to copy the best features and optimize their products and processes based on Glock's strengths and weaknesses and how the market sees them. Some people wanted Glock to add a manual safety. Boom, who makes polymer handguns with manual safeties now? Some people complained Glocks are bulky and feel funny in their hand. SR9 anyone, MP9?

I went with the Glock, but I'm very into brand loyalty, unless you piss me off I do business with what has worked for me in the past. I like the simpicity, I like the availability of parts, the service reputation and the fact that my last Glock was a great gun.

__________________
Decent law abiding people must fear criminals and the law while criminals have nothing to fear.

isn't it amazing when a company makes a product that is just about perfect... they go and change it ??? why ?

This can occur when the Big Kahuna of a privately held company decides change is something he would like to do just for the sake of doing something to pass the time. If this is indeed happening within the Glock organization, we consumers will just have to tolerate it and hope that phase passes.

This can occur when the Big Kahuna of a privately held company decides change is something he would like to do just for the sake of doing something to pass the time. If this is indeed happening within the Glock organization, we consumers will just have to tolerate it and hope that phase passes.

or consumers could quit buying their products... and when their profits dwindle... maybe they would take notice

But the price tag on a new gen4 is 20-30$ more than a new gen3? This thread is depressing

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

How many magazines with third generation vs. a Gen4?

__________________Bruce I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me"Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.

Show me a major gun company that isn't constantly looking to reduce costs, especially one that competes for LE/Gov sales ...

Sure..... every Company is looking to save money. Some just refuse to do it at the expense of quality.
Look at some of the Companies that are doing really well right now like BCM. I would be willing to bet their sales would go to hell if they started putting in sub-standard parts.
Even Colt is selling the LE6920 with a better stock (Rogers Super Stoc) than the rattle trap they were using.
People buy these guns because of the Quality.

I don't think most of the large LE/Gov. sales are going to DPMS and STAG.

I would have rather had Glock raise the price of their pistols by $50 dollars and keep the same extractors etc. than put in something that may or may not be as good. They could keep that 3rd magazine they now include with the Gen4s.

Just wondering, does anyone know of a vendor that sells Glock replacement parts so we could swap out the "compromised" or less durable parts with cast metal pieces or something other than MIM? I know allot of the parts aren't showing people any trouble for the most part, but I just prefer the idea of having the "more" durable parts in the firearm. Especially like the extractor, and related parts. I also noticed on the older glocks the trigger has ridges on it, but the new glocks, the trigger is just smooth (saving $ by reducing processes). I liked the grooves in the older glocks but to each his own.

Just wondering, does anyone know of a vendor that sells Glock replacement parts so we could swap out the "compromised" or less durable parts with cast metal pieces or something other than MIM? I know allot of the parts aren't showing people any trouble for the most part, but I just prefer the idea of having the "more" durable parts in the firearm. Especially like the extractor, and related parts. I also noticed on the older glocks the trigger has ridges on it, but the new glocks, the trigger is just smooth (saving $ by reducing processes). I liked the grooves in the older glocks but to each his own.

http://www.apextactical.com/
From what i've seen, they are selling like HOTCAKES!
I wonder why if there is not a problem with the OEM part?!

Just wondering, does anyone know of a vendor that sells Glock replacement parts so we could swap out the "compromised" or less durable parts with cast metal pieces or something other than MIM? I know allot of the parts aren't showing people any trouble for the most part, but I just prefer the idea of having the "more" durable parts in the firearm. Especially like the extractor, and related parts. I also noticed on the older glocks the trigger has ridges on it, but the new glocks, the trigger is just smooth (saving $ by reducing processes). I liked the grooves in the older glocks but to each his own.

The groves on the trigger is a points driven scheme by BATFE to be importable only required on compacts and sub compact Glocks. Full size Glock have smooth trigger and If you really like the grooved trigger you can put one in your full sized gun or vise versa.

Sure..... every Company is looking to save money. Some just refuse to do it at the expense of quality ...

It's the definition of the phrase "at the expense of quality" that can start to become problematic or contentious. I've heard personal opinions bordering on the innumerable, expressed by owners among various online gun forums, and most of them aren't exactly what you might call an "informed" opinion.

The use of MIM for parts in firearms is an example. Some folks have an instant abhorrent reaction, and often without knowing anything about the process or the achievable quality if results.

S&W owns their own MIM molds which is an expensive proposition, and they made the decision to do so reportedly because they wanted to retain control over the quality of the molds. The MIM houses they use aren't located offshore, either.

They operate the largest forging & heat treating facilities on the Eastern Seaboard, making parts (and performing other processes) for many other companies. I've heard they're supplying parts, assemblies & processes for other gun companies, as well as making parts for at least one well respected motorcycle company, and landing gear for aircraft. They have the capability to manufacture all parts needed for their products, but they still use outside vendors where possible ... supposedly not to save on costs, but to save on using up floorspace and manufacturing capability, in-house (until it's ever necessary, someday).

I remember when gun owners reacted the same way to the use of aluminum as pistol frames, or cast steel parts (versus forged) being used.

The funny thing is, I've seen more problems occur with cast & forged steel parts over the years than I have occur with MIM parts. Go figure, right?

Perish the thought of using a plastic compound for a frame!?!

Kind of depends on the application, the design and the quality of the materials, doesn't it?

Just as some cast is not representative of what's possible (and desirable) for all cast parts ... and ditto with forged ... the use of plastic & MIM depends on why, how & where it's used, and the way it's produced.

Quality control (and the consistency thereof ) also has a lot to do with how a product turns out, right?

Does anybody really think that Glock's introduction of the Gen4 guns was done as a cost-cutting measure?

99.99% of the time it's the Indian & not the arrow. The quality of shooters has gone down far more than the quality of guns.

Well, I wasn't going to put it quite that way ... but since you brought it up ...

As an instructor, I really miss the days when cops had to learn to shoot DA revolvers.

Having to shoot both strong & weak hand at 25 yards, and out to 50 yards, required the shooter to have some grasp of a good handgun shooting foundation, right?

Show me someone who has learned to accurately, controllably and effectively shoot a medium-framed Magnum DA revolver - in DA mode - having to deal with awkward shaped wooden grip stocks, a heavy & long DA trigger stroke, and learn to aim their shots because they've only got 6 rounds at the ready ... and I'll show you a person I'd much rather transition over to pistols, than try and teach a pistol shooter how to shoot a DA revolver.

I still see some older cops who may grumble about having to deal with loading magazines (instead of cylinders), and having to manipulate slide stop levers, magazine catches and decockers ... but who can drill threat targets as if their guns were radar guided. They may not necessarily like the new-fangled pistols (or cellphones, for that matter), but they've got that whole grip, trigger control & sight alignment/picture process down.

Using your logic, you shouldn't mind if they make your glock barrel and locking block out of Tin. It would be amusing to think certain parts may need to be made better/stronger!

I would rather pay a little more and maintain high standards than compromise on quality in ANY way.

You're not using logic. The method of making a part, has nothing to do with the material that is suitable, for that part. You can make cheaper frames, with cardboard. Would you buy a cardboard gun, if it was forged or hand made, by an experienced machinist?

Please, tell me, how do you know that quality has been compromised, because a particular part isn't made, using some process that you don't like?

If a gun wasn't built, using more modern methods, that cut cost, I couldn't afford to buy most guns, on the market, now. Parts can be produced, using MIM, to much tighter tolerances than most older methods. It's usually best, for small, intricate parts. Once the process has been set up, every single part, made in a mold will be exactly the same. Ruger has proven casting makes a strong gun frame. People said that was inferior to forging and maybe it is, but it works and keeps the prices where I can afford to buy a gun.

S&W is using MIM parts, in their revolvers and the 629 Classic that I have, is the smoothest trigger and best timed revolver that I own.

But the price tag on a new gen4 is 20-30$ more than a new gen3? This thread is depressing

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

What is the third magazine worth?

Quote:

Originally Posted by cajun_chooter

isn't it amazing when a company makes a product that is just about perfect... they go and change it ??? why ?

Well, unfortunately a lot of people (consumers) are not very smart, and they complain and bash and say they won't buy XYZ because it hasn't changed in 10+ years, therefore it is outdated and not worth their money.

__________________
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

Out of the pics below, guess which group of Glocks send brass to my face. I only have 2 Gen4 Glocks.

DING, DING, DING........ We have a winner!

I've put countless thousands of rounds through all of them and the only one the send brass flying into my face are the Gen 4 G26s. It doesn't take rocket science to figure out something has changed big time.
Yes fastbolt, it does depend on the application.
It looks like Glock hasn't figured out what parts they can cut corners on.

It's the definition of the phrase "at the expense of quality" that can start to become problematic or contentious. I've heard personal opinions bordering on the innumerable, expressed by owners among various online gun forums, and most of them aren't exactly what you might call an "informed" opinion.

The use of MIM for parts in firearms is an example. Some folks have an instant abhorrent reaction, and often without knowing anything about the process or the achievable quality if results.

S&W owns their own MIM molds which is an expensive proposition, and they made the decision to do so reportedly because they wanted to retain control over the quality of the molds. The MIM houses they use aren't located offshore, either.

They operate the largest forging & heat treating facilities on the Eastern Seaboard, making parts (and performing other processes) for many other companies. I've heard they're supplying parts, assemblies & processes for other gun companies, as well as making parts for at least one well respected motorcycle company, and landing gear for aircraft. They have the capability to manufacture all parts needed for their products, but they still use outside vendors where possible ... supposedly not to save on costs, but to save on using up floorspace and manufacturing capability, in-house (until it's ever necessary, someday).

I remember when gun owners reacted the same way to the use of aluminum as pistol frames, or cast steel parts (versus forged) being used.

The funny thing is, I've seen more problems occur with cast & forged steel parts over the years than I have occur with MIM parts. Go figure, right?

Perish the thought of using a plastic compound for a frame!?!

Kind of depends on the application, the design and the quality of the materials, doesn't it?

Just as some cast is not representative of what's possible (and desirable) for all cast parts ... and ditto with forged ... the use of plastic & MIM depends on why, how & where it's used, and the way it's produced.

Quality control (and the consistency thereof ) also has a lot to do with how a product turns out, right?

Does anybody really think that Glock's introduction of the Gen4 guns was done as a cost-cutting measure?

Dang, that was really well put . I must say after that I must agree with you on most points, however, just being the fact that allot of people have been posting about certain parts of the firearm "problematicing" away it still puts me on an uncertainty to some extent, despite being the fact that Glock is supposed to be the "standard" when it comes to good'ol fashion durability, reliability, and economically. I like Glock's because logically, it makes perfect sense to own one; the tool works when you need it to, and the tool does not need to be treated like as if it were fragile. {"Gaston Glock, if you are reading this PLEASE revert back to your previous method/s of placing functionality over form"}

Dang, that was really well put . I must say after that I must agree with you on most points, however, just being the fact that allot of people have been posting about certain parts of the firearm "problematicing" away it still puts me on an uncertainty to some extent, despite being the fact that Glock is supposed to be the "standard" when it comes to good'ol fashion durability, reliability, and economically. I like Glock's because logically, it makes perfect sense to own one; the tool works when you need it to, and the tool does not need to be treated like as if it were fragile. {"Gaston Glock, if you are reading this PLEASE revert back to your previous method/s of placing functionality over form"}

Marshall

There are folks who have alots of first hand experience besides high Glocktalk post counts that DO think there is a problem.
Some people are so blind loyal, they will never admit their holy brand may have an Issue.